mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014131.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "25",
    "document_number": "763",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 25 of 197 2566\nLCFCmax1\n1 inconsistent.\n2 Transcript at 476, lines 14 through 16, sustained for\n3 the same reasons as the last two.\n4 Transcript at 476, line 17 through 19, sustained for\n5 the same reasons.\n6 Transcript at 477, sustained for the same reasons.\n7 Transcript at 478, overruled.\n8 Transcript at 479 to 80, overruled.\n9 Transcript at 480, sustained. There is no\n10 inconsistency, because Jane's answer that she doesn't remember\n11 and her prior statement that she did not know whether\n12 Ms. Maxwell was present, there is no inconsistency.\n13 Transcript at 499, 507 to 508, I will overrule.\n14 Transcript at 506 to 7, sustained. Jane admitted to\n15 making the prior statement.\n16 Transcript at 512 to 13, sustained. Jane's prior\n17 statement that they hiked is not inconsistent with her\n18 testimony. Also not material.\n19 Transcript at 513, overruled.\n20 Transcript at 514, overruled.\n21 Transcript at 514 to 15, sustained. Jane's prior\n22 statement about abuse in New York not being, quote, a group\n23 thing, is not inconsistent with her testimony.\n24 Transcript at 521 to 22, sustained. Jane agreed with\n25 virtually all of the details of this event, except for the\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 25 of 197 2566",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LCFCmax1\n1 inconsistent.\n2 Transcript at 476, lines 14 through 16, sustained for\n3 the same reasons as the last two.\n4 Transcript at 476, line 17 through 19, sustained for\n5 the same reasons.\n6 Transcript at 477, sustained for the same reasons.\n7 Transcript at 478, overruled.\n8 Transcript at 479 to 80, overruled.\n9 Transcript at 480, sustained. There is no\n10 inconsistency, because Jane's answer that she doesn't remember\n11 and her prior statement that she did not know whether\n12 Ms. Maxwell was present, there is no inconsistency.\n13 Transcript at 499, 507 to 508, I will overrule.\n14 Transcript at 506 to 7, sustained. Jane admitted to\n15 making the prior statement.\n16 Transcript at 512 to 13, sustained. Jane's prior\n17 statement that they hiked is not inconsistent with her\n18 testimony. Also not material.\n19 Transcript at 513, overruled.\n20 Transcript at 514, overruled.\n21 Transcript at 514 to 15, sustained. Jane's prior\n22 statement about abuse in New York not being, quote, a group\n23 thing, is not inconsistent with her testimony.\n24 Transcript at 521 to 22, sustained. Jane agreed with\n25 virtually all of the details of this event, except for the",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "763",
      "2566",
      "476",
      "477",
      "478",
      "479",
      "480",
      "499",
      "507",
      "508",
      "506",
      "512",
      "513",
      "514",
      "521",
      "522"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}